JUDGMENT A. S. NAIDU, J. — A dissatisfied claimant-land owner has filed this appeal under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act (herein¬after called ‘the Act’) challenging the quantum of award passed by the Land Acquisition Collector, which was confirmed in a reference made under Section 18 of the Act by the Civil Judge (S.D.), Berhampur in M.J.C. No. 94 of 1993. 2. Short of all unnecessary details, the short facts leading to filing of the present First Appeal are that the Gov¬ernment of Orissa by its Notification issued under Section 4(1) of the Act dated 12th August, 1988, published in the Orissa Gazette dated 29th October, 1988, acquired a total land measuring Ac. 7.81 decimals appertaining to different Survey numbers and Khata numbers situated at village Ambapua under Berhampur Tahsil for the purpose of extension of Housing Accommodation Scheme of the Berhampur Regional Improvement Trust, now known as the Ber¬hampur Development Authority. Out of the said acquired lands, an area of Ac.0.800 decimals appertaining to Survey Nos. 958 and 699 was owned and possessed by the appellant and she was the exclu¬sive owner thereof. 3. The Land Acquisition Officer, in exercise of the power conferred upon him under Section 11 of the Act passed an award valuing the acquired land of the appellant at the rate of Rs. 1,00,000.00 (one lakh) per acre along with other ancillary bene¬fits flowing under the Act. Being aggrieved by the said award, the appellant filed an objection under Section 18 of the Act which was referred to the then Subordinate Judge, Berhampur, now Civil Judge (S.D.), Berhampur. According to the appellant, her lands were situated in an advantageous position by the side of a main road and according to Government letter dated 21.1.1992 issued by the Revenue and Excise Department, the value of such lands had been fixed at the rate of Rs. 8,00,000.00 (eight lakhs) per acre. It was also contended that the registering officer while impounding the sale deed by which the lands were purchased by the appellant from her mother-in-law had valued the lands at the rate of Rs. 2,00,000.00 (two lakhs) per acre. On the afore¬said basis, the claimant-appellant claimed a compensation for her lands at the rate of Rs. 2,00,000.00 (three lakhs) per acre apart from other statutory benefits. 2,00,000.00 (two lakhs) per acre. On the afore¬said basis, the claimant-appellant claimed a compensation for her lands at the rate of Rs. 2,00,000.00 (three lakhs) per acre apart from other statutory benefits. The Land Acquisition Collector strenuously contested the claim for enhancement of compensation mainly on the ground that the communication issued by the Government fixing the value of land at the rate of Rs. 8,00.000.00 (eight lakhs) per acre had been turned down and that the claimant had purchased Ac. 0.600 decimals out of the acquired land from her mother-in-law only for Rs. 3,000.00 in the year 1977 and the rest Ac. 0.200 decimals in the same year for Rs. 1,000.00 and thus she was not entitled to any higher compensation. 4. To substantiate her case, the appellant-objector exam¬ined one witness and exhibited seventeen documents. On behalf of the State, neither by witness was examined nor any document was exhibited. 5. The learned Civil Judge (S.D.) relying upon a decision of this Court in Gouranga Naik v. State of Orissa, 1991 (II) OLR 226, held that the Notification issued by the Government fixing the valuation of the land at the rate of Rs. 8,00,000.00 (eight lakhs) per acre was struck down and thus the objector-appellant was not entitled to compensation at the said rate. It is perti¬nent to mention here that the Notification was filed and marked as Ext. 16. 6. The Court below also declined to accept the considera¬tion amount reflected in the sale deeds Exts. 5 to 7, which were in respect of lands situated near about the acquired lands on the ground that all the said three sale-deeds were executed in the year 1988, i.e. just before the Section 4 Notification was issued and those related to small portions of homestead lands, and held that the same could not be treated to be the guiding factor for determining the valuation of the lands of the claimant acquired in this case. 7. The sale-deeds Exts. 12 and 15 produced by the claim¬ant-appellant were not taken into consideration as the same related to the years 1991 and 1992, i.e. long after the acquisi¬tion of the lands in the present case. 7. The sale-deeds Exts. 12 and 15 produced by the claim¬ant-appellant were not taken into consideration as the same related to the years 1991 and 1992, i.e. long after the acquisi¬tion of the lands in the present case. The claim for higher com¬pensation was turned down by the Court below on the ground that the claimant herself had purchased the lands for paltry amounts and as such could not claim any higher valuation than the prices indicated in the sale deeds by which she had acquired the lands. On the basis of such discussion and relying upon the value fixed by the Land Acquisition Collector with regard to the adjoining lands, the Civil Judge (S.D.). confirmed the valuation of the lands at the rate of Rs. 1,00,000.00 (one lakh) per acre and answered the reference accordingly. The said order is impugned in this First Appeal. 8. The claimant appeared before this Court in person and argued in extenso. We have also perused the lower Court records and other documents available. According to the appellant, the lands originally belonged to her mother-in-law. She (mother-in-law) was suffering from cancer and urgently needed money for her treatment. To safeguard the interest and to protect his share, an amount of Rs. 20,000.00 was paid by the husband of the appellant to her mother-in-law in lieu of executing the sale deeds in favour of the appellant. According to the appellant, the transac¬tions were in the family and were under extraordinary circum¬stances. Thus, nominal prices were quoted in the sale deeds which could not be considered to be the real value of the lands in question. According to the appellant,even the registering officer did not accept the valuation of the lands and impounded the sale deeds calculating the valuation of the lands at the rate of Rs. 2,00,000.00 per acre which was the prevailing market value. According to the appellant, the Land Acquisition Officer as well as the Civil Judge acted illegally and with material irregularity in not accepting at least Rs. 2,00,000.00 as the valuation of the lands as determined by the registering officer and the order is thus not tenable in law. 9. 2,00,000.00 per acre which was the prevailing market value. According to the appellant, the Land Acquisition Officer as well as the Civil Judge acted illegally and with material irregularity in not accepting at least Rs. 2,00,000.00 as the valuation of the lands as determined by the registering officer and the order is thus not tenable in law. 9. The principle for determination of market value has been laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of Special Land Acquisition Officer, Davangere v. P. Veerabhadarappa etc., AIR 1984 SC 774 , as follows : “.......The function of the Court in awarding compensation under the Act is to ascertain the market value of the land at the date of the notification under Section 4 (1) of the Act and the methods of valuation may be : (1) opinion of experts, (2) the prices paid within a reasonable time in bona fide transactions of purchase or sale of the lands acquired or of the land adjacent to those acquired and possessing similar advantages, and (3) a number of years’ purchase of the actual or immediately prospec¬tive profits of the lands acquired. Normally, the method of capitalising the actual or immediately prospective profits or the rent of a number of years’ purchase should not be resorted to if there is evidence of comparable sales or other evidence for computation of the market value. It can be resorted to only when no other method is available.” 10. Admittedly the acquired lands were homestead. This gets corroborated from the fact that the same were acquired for Hous¬ing Accommodation Scheme. Determination of market value of a land with potentialities for urban use is an intricate exercise which calls for collection and collation of diverse economic criteria. The market value of a piece of property for the purpose of determination of compensation is stated to be the price at which the property changes hands from a willing seller to a will¬ing, but not too anxious buyer. The determination of market value is the prediction of an economic event, viz., the price outcome of a hypothetical sale expressed in terms of probabilities. The determination of market value is the prediction of an economic event, viz., the price outcome of a hypothetical sale expressed in terms of probabilities. Prices fetched for similar lands with similar advantages and potentialities under bona fide transactions of sale at or about the time of the preliminary Notification are the usual and indeed the best evidences of market value (see Administrator General of W.B. v. Collector, Varanasi, AIR 1988 SC 943 ). 11. It is well settled that at the one hand unfairly low value should not be awarded, on the other hand the temptation of over generosity for awarding higher value must be equally resist¬ed. Such generosity at the public expenses reacts against the development and against the property of the country and imposes an unnecessary burden on the tax-payers, as has been observed by the Supreme Court in AIR 1979 SC 472 . 12. In the case at hand, admittedly the lands were pur¬chased by the claimant-appellant from her mother-in-law who was in distress. The transactions were purely within the family. Thus the nominal prices for which the transactions were made cannot be accepted as the real market value of the lands with prudence. The Notification Ext. 16 basing upon which higher compensation at the rate of Rs. 8,00,000.00 (eight lakhs) per acre was claimed having been struck down by this Court, the Civil Judge (S.D.) rightly discarded the same. But then the registering officer, taking into consideration the sale statistics had determined the valuation of the lands at the rate of Rs.2,00,000.00 (two lakhs) per acre and had charged extra stamp duty. Contemporaneous sale deeds, i.e. Exts. 5, 6 and 7, also support the valuation determined by the Sub-Registrar, i.e. Rs.2,00.000.00 per acre. But then, these sale deeds have been discarded by the Court below on the ground that the same related to small pieces of homestead lands. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and the evidence on record, both oral and documentary, in the light of the ratio of the decisions of the Supreme Court (supra). we feel that the valuation of the acquired lands of the appellant should be fixed at the rate of Rs. 1,50,000.00 (one lakh fifty thousand) per acre instead of Rs. 1,00,000.00 (one lakh) which would be, according to us, just, proper and equitable. 13. we feel that the valuation of the acquired lands of the appellant should be fixed at the rate of Rs. 1,50,000.00 (one lakh fifty thousand) per acre instead of Rs. 1,00,000.00 (one lakh) which would be, according to us, just, proper and equitable. 13. Accordingly, we allow this First Appeal and set aside the impugned decision of the learned Civil Judge (S.D.). We direct that the appellant will be entitled to a compensation at the rate of Rs. 1,50,000.00 (one lakh fifty thousand) per acre in respect of her lands acquired apart from other statutory benefits available under the Act and the said amount be paid expeditious¬ly. Parties to bear their respective costs. First Appeal allowed.